Catholic Social Teaching: Beyond Left and Right

  • Thread starter Thread starter StudentMI
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StudentMI

Guest
I’ve been reading a lot about Catholic social teaching these past couple months and I wanted to discuss its teachings and implications.

After the reading I’ve done, I’ve come to the conclusion that it exists beyond traditional left/right polarities. In fact it renders them virtually meaningless when applied to itself. Individual rights? Its got that. Socialization? Got that too. The cool part is that it integrates all these seemingly disparate elements seamlessly.

It does not, of course, offer a complete system that could be implemented everywhere in the exact same way, and this is one of its strengths. It acknowledges different cultural and social situations and contexts that may make this element more pronounced. What it does is provide a set of principles whereby one can judge the morality of different actions. And indeed, as the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church says, it is part of the moral teaching of the Magisterium.

That’s all I’ve got. I was wondering what others think.
 
StudentMI said:
That’s all I’ve got. I was wondering what others think
Click to expand...
Nothing much, except that I agree with what you’ve said. I’m generally wary of defining myself as either left-wing or right-wing as I find that I agree with positions from both ends of the spectrum. For example, in the context of American politics (which are not at all similar to politics in my country), I would support anti-abortion positions (which, unless I’m completely mistaken, is a right-wing position) as well as universal healthcare (which I don’t think is such a huge issue but for certain reasons seems to be quite controversial in the States).
 
It was a very long time ago that I read the social justice documents, starting with Rerum Novarum. They paint a fairly broad picture; the difficulties begin when the proposals start to flow, if for no other reason than they are often too detached from any reality to ever be translated into practical application.

My favorite group is St. Vincent dePaul; their motto seems to be “A hand up, not a handout”, as they seek to provide a resolution to poverty rather than a bandaide.
 
otjm said:
They paint a fairly broad picture; the difficulties begin when the proposals start to flow, if for no other reason than they are often too detached from any reality to ever be translated into practical application.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree with that. Experience shows across many cultures that such proposals can be applied, often with great success. I would also urge you to recognize the authority it holds as part of the Magisterium.

I read a good quote from an author in a book on Catholic social teaching. He said many object that it’s too difficult. So is chastity. The Church doesn’t change its teaching because of that.
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
I would also urge you to recognize the authority it holds as part of the Magisterium.
Click to expand...
I have not denied the authority. And as you are not in this country, it may be that you have not been exposed to what are termed the Social Justice Warriors. It is their chin chatter to which I was referring.

If you wish an example, I will reference “the homeless”, which is a broad, sweeping category from people who have lost a job and have no means of paying rent - and simply need help getting steady employment, to those who are drug addicts and to those who are mentally disabled. Vast difference between the two groups.

I noted one group - Catholic - which has an excellent track record, among other issues, providing employment to unskilled workers who often have minimal capabilities, and providing low cost housing to people in need. They also screen, have a set of clearly defined"do’s and don’ts" and run a tight ship. It works, but too often the SJWs take none of that into account, or respond that one is being (pick your personal favorite adjective here for the issue - “racist”, White Privilege" and on down the road of disparagement to include slurs against the Church).

It is the SJWs who rail against the drug companies who make drugs which could help people, for example, in Africa. What they fail to consider is that someone - for example, a wife infected with AIDS by her husband, and the likelihood her children will also be infected - is that not only does the wife have no clock or watch with which to tell time so she can time her medications; she may not even have access to adequate water supplies regularly with which to take the medication. AIDs being only one example; many communities are ravaged by cholera, malaria, tuberculosis, measles (exceedingly deadly to adults) dysentery and a host of other “curable” or treatable diseases.

In short, they fail to understand what it takes in the real world to treat issues not just of poverty, but of the atendant host of issues people in poverty are trying to deal with.

There is a Chinese proverb: if you give a man a fish, he can eat for a day. If you teach a man to fish, he can eat for a lifetime.

What the SJWs too often fail to understand is that you may or may not be able to teach them to “fish”, as you can run into cultural issues which are overwhelming (and I speak from personal experience).

I am not at all against help. What I am against is people who do not and will not think through the real world practical problems attendant to the desire to help.

I am not saying that help is not possible., I am saying that too many are unrealistic as to what it takes to help, and the very real world fact that some cannot be helped.
 
otjm said:
I have not denied the authority.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry I included that last line. It wasn’t really appropriate.

Social justice has indeed been hijacked by the left, but the term itself is not irrelevant because of that. Catholic social justice refers to more than just throwing money at a problem. Nothing you’ve said really conflicts with that.

However the part about people who cannot be helped, how do you propose we treat them?
 
You have no idea how many times I’ve made that same argument. And I fully admit that I’m a conservative. But it’s like when people say that Catholics are liberal or Catholics are conservative , nah dude, Catholics are Catholic. Now I do distinctly remember my Diocesan newspaper printing information that was untrue about Church teaching, because it was a position that the USCCB supports, but that the Vatican has taken no position on, and it would be considered leftist. I don’t want to get into that, be obedient to your Bishop, but know that sometimes they make mistakes, too.
 
The “left-right” spectrum in current politics lies on the same materialistic or naturalistic plane. One end is more Liberal and the other more Socialist, but in their conceptions of the common good, neither takes into account man’s original or supernatural end he is called to, nor the origin and source of public authority, nor look to the true religion to inform their conception of the common good.

When it comes to politics, the Church can provide the authoritative principles that define the good in “common good” but debating and determining the practical measures that should be taken within those principles in any given circumstances to maximize that good is what politics at its best is all about. Those decisions are properly the responsibility of civil authority, not the Church (our pastors are of course free to give their opinions, just like the rest of us).
 
Last edited:
Genesis315 said:
When it comes to politics, the Church can provide the authoritative principles that define the good in “common good” but debating and determining the practical measures that should be taken within those principles in any given circumstances to maximize that good is what politics at its best is all about.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it looks like Catholics as a whole are still arguing in binary terms. How many Catholics agitate for socializing some means of production as St John Paul II advocated? How many entertain the idea? And how many times do those who do so get shouted down as socialists who are violating the right to private property, which is not absolute?
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind it calls for outlawing abortion and pornography, considers socialization of some means of production acceptable, is in favor of worker owned enterprises, advocates state involvement in labor disputes if necessary, unions, free markets, calls health care a right, etc.
 
Last edited:
Yes, all that is true, but it doesn’t answer your question about “left” and “right.” Those terms mean different things to different people.
 
In a way the terms are irrelevant. They arose as terms for French politics regarding who was against the current government.
 
If the terms are irrelevant, why are you using them in the title of this thread?
 
I’m just saying in a way. I’m not saying they don’t have practical meaning for many. Which is why it’s easy short hand.
 
Have you ever read anything by Fr. Neuhaus? If not, the link I gave you would be a good place to start.
 
No I haven’t. I’m familiar with the fight between him and Chronicles magazine that led to the founding of First Things.

I just realized I have a copy of American Babylon somewhere amongst my books. I picked up a copy at a library for a dollar.
 
Last edited:
I’m 100% on board with that. In fact, it’s one of the things that brought me out of either party. Of course, it means I end up voting 3rd party most of the time. The most recent one I like is the American Solidarity party. But I’m okay with that.
 
In America many, unfortunately, rely on the left or the right. The best in my opinion is to not rely or trust in government affiliation. I think part of the problem is the media couches every argument in political terms. I would hope one day the media just reports the news. For example America contracted 4.8 percent last quarter, and instead of that making the news the glitzy media reports on the stock market. I hear at the end of the week we may get Depression era unemployment numbers, but again the media doesn’t report it.

So, again, if you are an American not impacted by the current Economy the best thing to do is save, pay down your mortgage and work within your community to build it up. You can’t rely on left or right to solve problems. And again have compassion for everyone regardless of political affiliation. The left or the right aren’t your enemy, and honestly this country is so vast neither political party can address the needs of all regions of the country. So much of the tension caused by left in right is in regards to differences in cultures of regions. Reading Jack Kerouac, this country has never been unified and tv from the start has been toxic in giving the illusion of America.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top